He who decides the meaning of the word is the master
By Thomas L. Jipping
web posted November 19, 2001
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful
tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor
less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words
mean different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master -
that's all."
He who determines the meaning of words is indeed the master.
Bill Clinton fiddled with the meaning of words such as "sexual
relations," "alone," and "is" and became the master. He was
impeached but not removed from office. He was suspended
from practicing law in Arkansas but not disbarred. He cut a deal
with the independent counsel but was not prosecuted. And now
he's making six-figures a speech, doing commercials with Bob
Dole, and working on his political future.
Judges are truly our masters by fiddling with the meaning of
words. The Supreme Court does it with the Constitution all the
time. The Court secularized our culture by fiddling with the
words "establishment of religion" in the First Amendment. The
Court gave the federal government power over everything by
fiddling with the word "commerce" in Article I. The Court
launched the culture of death by fiddling with the word "liberty" in
the Fourteenth Amendment.
Legislatures and courts fiddle with the word "discrimination" and
suddenly we find that treating people differently based on race is
required to avoid treating people differently based on race.
Fiddling with the words "sexual harassment" has transformed the
workplace.
I attended law school at the State University of New York at
Buffalo. The faculty unanimously passed a policy banning racist,
sexist, anti-lesbian, ageist, and other remarks based on prejudice
and group stereotype. But, I thought, the First Amendment
applies to state institutions and the First Amendment doesn't
allow bans on speech based on its content. And here, it was my
First Amendment professor who had drafted this censorship
policy. Then I discovered the faculty had just fiddled with words
a little; these remarks were not actually speech, they said, but
harassment. And schools can certainly ban harassment to
improve the educational environment. Isn't that neat, just come
up with a different label, call it something else, and anything is
possible. Call it speech, and the Constitution makes me the
master. Call it harassment, and the school authorities become the
master. As Humpty Dumpty said, the question is which will be
master, that's all.
Now we see the same thing happening in this war on terrorism.
Everything from Special Forces troops and carpet bombs in
Afghanistan to wiretaps, warrantless searches, and detention
without criminal charges right here in America are being used
against this thing called terrorism. Congress just radically
expanded the FBI's powers to fight this thing called terrorism.
The consequences of fiddling with the word "speech" in law
school seemed major at the time, but the consequences that flow
from the word "terrorism" can literally mean life and death.
Do we know what this thing called "terrorism" is, this thing that
all the police and military might of the United States is attacking?
You might have thought so, but in steps Tom Ridge, the Director
of the new Office of Homeland Security. The anti-terrorism czar.
Not long ago, he said something truly frightening. Referring to
Americans who "lash out" at people who dress differently or
practice a different religion, he said "we have a word for that:
terrorism."
That law school censorship policy was so scary because what it
prohibited was so open to subjective impression. I was called
racist because I opposed race-based policies. I was called sexist
because I opposed killing babies in the womb. I was called
homophobic because I thought children ought to be raised by a
father and mother. And who knows what "ageist" is? Suddenly,
harassment was in the eye or ear of the beholder, a serious
problem because attaching the label "harassment" had negative
consequences.
Now we see the same problem on a grand scale. What is
"lashing out"? Mr. Ridge was talking not about physical attacks,
which of course would otherwise be against the law, but about
speech. My law school labeled "harassment" speech the
authorities did not like. Mr. Ridge appears to be saying the
government will label "terrorism" speech the authorities do not
like. Do you see a very troubling pattern here?
When the feds like Mr. Ridge use a word, it means what they
choose it to mean, neither more nor less. Yes, they can make
words mean different things and the power do so makes them
the master. With all the new powers the feds just received, it
makes all the difference in the world what the word "terrorism"
means. It's the difference between freedom and tyranny,
between life and death. Words are serious business.
Tom Jipping is the director of the Center for Law and
Democracy at the Free Congress Foundation (http:
//www.FreeCongress.org).
Enter Stage Right - http://www.enterstageright.com